The law of love, peace and liberty in the states extending to Jews, Turks and Egyptians, as they are considered sons of Adam, which is the glory of the outward state of Holland, soe love, peace and liberty, extending to all in Christ Jesus, condemns hatred, war and bondage. And because our Saviour sayeth it is impossible but that offences will come, but woe unto him by whom they cometh, our desire is not to offend one of his little ones, in whatsoever form, name or title hee appears in, whether Presbyterian, Independent, Baptist or Quaker, but shall be glad to see anything of God in any of them, desiring to doe unto all men as we desire all men should doe unto us, which is the true law both of Church and State; for our Saviour sayeth this is the law and the prophets.
That is from a document issued this day, 1657, and sent to Peter Stuyvesant, entitled Remonstrance of the Inhabitants of the Town of Flushing to Governor Stuyvesant.
The editor of the Encyclopedia of New York, Kenneth Jackson, draws our attention to this remarkable and largely unknown document in and op ed in today's New York Times entitled A Colony With a Conscience. Jackson notes the occasion, a decision by Stuyvesant, who :
ordered the public torturing of Robert Hodgson, a 23-year-old Quaker convert who had become an influential preacher. And then he issued a harsh ordinance, punishable by fine and imprisonment, against anyone found guilty of harboring Quakers.. This was despite the fact that
The Netherlands had enshrined freedom of conscience in 1579, when it clearly established that "no one shall be persecuted or investigated because of his religion." And when the Dutch West India Company set up a trading post at the southern tip of Manhattan in 1625, the purpose was to make money, not to save souls. Because the founding idea was trade, the directors of the firm took pains to ensure that all were welcome.and that by the time of this incident
there were no religious tests in the Dutch colony. So open was New Amsterdam that at least 16 languages were being spoken there by the 1640s; by 1654, the first Jews in what is now the United States had been able to settle there peaceably.But of course the early Quakers were certainly a "threat" to public order, and were considered effective rabble rousers. Hence Stuveysant's order.
But the charter of the Town of Flushing, part of the colony, had a 1647 charter which guaranteed religious freedom, so the clerk gathered others and issued this document, of which Jackson notes four important things
1) it articulated a fundamental right
2) it was issued publicly to a man not himself known for his tolerance or patience
3) the signers stood up for others, as none was himself a Quaker
4) it uses beautiful language to express its powerful sentiments
Of course, as Jackson notes, the document was not immediately effective: Stuyvesant arrested the two men who presented the document to him and forced other signatories to recant. But a precedent had been set, and when in 1662 Stuyvesant arrested John Bowne for been holding Quaker meeting in his home and banished him, Bowne went to Amsterdam to appeal for the Quakers. The result?
Though the Dutch West India Company called Quakerism an "abominable religion," it nevertheless overruled Stuyvesant in 1663 and ordered him to "allow everyone to have his own belief." Thus did religious toleration become the law of the colony.
Jackson argues that this document was more important to establishing religious freedom in what would eventually become a key part of our new Republic than were the actions of Roger Williams. I'm not sure I would concur. Williams opened his colony to all, regardless of any belief, establishing his settlement in 1637, and after a series of actions that affirmed the idea of religious freedom, including a proclamation in 1640, and obtaining a charter in 1643. In fact, by 1652 Rhode Island had banned slavery.
And the Flushing Remonstrance was surprisingly not considered important enough for New York to include it in the mandatory New York history we studied growing up in the 1950s. Thus I did not myself encounter it until much later in life, when I was exploring my Jewish roots and one of my relatives pointed me at it.
I am clearly interested in religion and its intersection with politics. The diary I reposted last night as Religion and politics - a diary I hope still has relevance is one example of this interest. I have written other diaries on the topic as well.
The Remonstrance is short, only four paragraphs. And Jackson is accurate as to the power and clarity of the language it uses. And its expansiveness. One notes that it includes "Jews, Turks, and Egyptians", showing a tolerance of Islam that would be admirable were we to see it more widely practiced in our nation today. And the final paragraph of the Remonstrance is a clarion call:
Therefore if any of these said persons come in love unto us, we cannot in conscience lay violent hands upon them, but give them free egresse and regresse unto our Town, and houses, as God shall persuade our consciences, for we are bounde by the law of God and man to doe good unto all men and evil to noe man. And this is according to the patent and charter of our Towne, given unto us in the name of the States General, which we are not willing to infringe, and violate, but shall houlde to our patent and shall remaine, your humble subjects, the inhabitants of Vlishing.
Bound by the law of God and Man to do good unto all men and evil to no man.
A document 350 years ago set for us a model from which we could well still learn. And the fruits of that document perhaps can be seen in Jackson's final paragraph:
The Bowne house is still standing. And within a few blocks of it a modern visitor to Flushing will encounter a Quaker meeting house, a Dutch Reformed church, an Episcopal church, a Catholic church, a synagogue, a Hindu temple and a mosque. All coexist in peace, appropriately in the most diverse neighborhood in the most diverse borough in the most diverse city on the planet.
There is so much in our history. Not all is good. As a Quaker I am aware of the executions of the Boston Martyrs, four Quakers hung in Massachusetts Bay in 1659, 1660 and 1661 for their religion, of whom perhaps the best known is Mary Dyer, executed in 1660. As one of Jewish background I know my religious forebears were barred from holding Maryland public office until the Jew Bill of 1826, largely the work of one man, Thomas Kennedy from Hagerstown, who at the time he began his efforts had never even met a Jew. We have two Supreme Court decisions wrestling with the right of Jehovah's Witnesses not to violate their beliefs by participation in Pledge of Allegiance Ceremonies, with the Court allowing their expulsion from public schools in 1940 in the Gobitis case, but fortunately reversing that judgment three years later in the Barnette decision.
I admit to a personal intolerance of those who would suppress or denigrate religious expressions other than their own. I am more than irritated at the ignorance displayed by many religious and political leaders in how they demagogue the issue of the religions of others, and it amazes me that someone can while in uniform disparage the religion of over 1 billion people and then get promoted, as happened with General Boykin during the current administration.
I hope that in the periodic postings by several on this site that explore the intersection of religion, politics, and government, we can understand the importance for our survival as a democracy for maintaining a broad acceptance of religious difference, including between those who consider themselves people of faith and those who reject for themselves any allegiance to religion, organized or other. At the same time, I also assert that without a strong insistence upon separation between religion and state we will not survive as a democracy, and thus we all must be ever watchful of those who would move the line in order to advance their own religious persuasion, use the cover of religion for personal or political gain, or to remove from our common community those with whom they disagree on matters of faith or the political and moral views that might flow therefrom.
350 years ago today a remarkable document was written, signed, and presented. That is an occasion at least worth remembering.
Peace.
As Jefferson wrote in his Notes on Virginia,
But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
I want a society in which anywhere on that spectrum and beyond, from no gods to 300 million if that pleases you, so long as you do not seek to impose upon others you have full freedom to participate in this society, enriching us all by your presence.
Peace.